Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED –

THAT Councillor Matthew Kirk be elected Chair of Licensing Panel B for this meeting only.

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance on remote meetings be noted.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Lorna Greenwood (Chair) and Jenny Headlam-Wells.

There were no such declarations.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for at least six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast.”

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them. Those participating in the meeting were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.

Tabled Paper

A supplementary agenda was published which included which included a floor plan of the premises in respect of Cell Phone Vape City.

Application Resolved

The application for Agenda Item 6, in respect of Boxpark Camden, was resolved ahead of the meeting and would therefore not be considered by the Panel. The Chair commended the applicant for working with the interested parties and Responsible Authorities to address their concerns and resolve outstanding issues.

There was none.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

This application was resolved ahead of the meeting and was therefore not considered by the Panel.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities.

Sarah Williams, Licensing Officer, summarised the report and confirmed that the application was not in a Cumulative Impact Policy Area. 

The Licensing Officer also reported that five relevant representations had been submitted by local residents. The applicant had engaged with the Police Responsible Authority and agreed to amend the application in line with framework hours and agreed additional conditions.

It was noted that the interested parties’ who had made a submission in objection to the application were not in attendance. The panel agreed to proceed in their absence, as per Regulation 20 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, and took the submissions as read.

The applicant’s representative, Diana Lupulesc, confirmed that there were no amendments to the application.

In making their submission the applicant’s representative, reported that:

• The conditions detailed in the agenda, as agreed with the Police Responsible Authority promote the licencing objective relating to the prevention of crime and disorder.
• No objections have been received in respect of the application from any of the responsible authorities.
• Robust measures were in place by way of enforceable conditions, to ensure the premises is not detrimental to residents living in the close proximity and members of the public.
• Some of the objections received were deemed to be speculative and make reference to external issues which were not connected to the operation of the premises.
• No internal or external drinking was to be permitted at the premises. Alcohol sales will be firmly restricted to off sale of alcohol and must be taken away from the premises.
• There was an awareness that the applicant faced the potential of being prosecuted or could be subject to a licence review, should any breaches occur.

Responding to questions the applicant’s representative, explained that:

• The decision to sell alcohol was economically driven and the applicant wished to diversify their business. The intention was to focus more on higher end spirits, such as whiskey, rather than beers, cider and lager.
• The shop had been trading for roughly one year.
• It was difficult to control what happened outside of premises, such as the reported issues with people congregating in the street. However, there was a barber shop next door, and it was suspected that many of the people congregating in the street were customers of that premises, rather than the shop, as generally a customer would make their purchase and leave, rather than hang around outside.
• Alcohol would be handed to the customer upon purchase, rather than the customer be able to pick it up off the shelf. There was space behind the counter to store alcohol, so that it was not accessible prior to purchase.

The applicant's representative made some closing remarks.

Deliberation and Reasons

Panel Members confirmed that they had been able to follow and understand the submissions and discussion in relation to the application in respect of Cell Phone Vape City.

In deliberation, the Panel noted that the applicant had worked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

There was none.